Cookie Notice

WE LOVE THE NATIONS OF EUROPE

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Saturday, 13 April 2019

Wolf warns that wolves can kill

Readers may recall that we gone to some lengths to present evidence of the malign effects of globalism upon our nation and people. These effects are largely responsible for 17.4m people voting in the biggest vote in our history to Leave the EU and include, but not exclusively

Increasing financial inequality

Static or declining living standards

People excluded from decision making

Decline of working class power

Globalism causing disempowerment

Cultural loss – loss of cultural identity

Attrition of social institutions, high anomie

Our people and our economy face a triple whammy over the next fifteen years or so. Firstly are the effects of globalism we are already experiencing – both the Elephant, and the uncorrected distortions from the 2008 crash that have left large cohorts of our people worse off but highly taxed. Secondly will be the whirlwind of the coming downturn, for which the banks are better prepared than a decade ago but the British people are not, now carrying record levels of personal indebtedness. As QE is winding down, China slowing, bond market manipulation reaching its peak and the Eurozone intensely vulnerable to shocks, the storm is gathering.

The third blow of the whammy will come from the effects of AI. I recommend a report from PwC that takes a position between other economic estimates of AI impact on UK jobs, which range from job losses of 10% to 47%. PwC estimate that 30% of UK jobs will go in the next 15 years, and the report does a fair job of rationalising the losses. However, it's what the report doesn't say that's important.

PwC and other economists assume that the negative effects of job losses can be compensated for by an increased tax-take and higher GDP from boosted productivity. This will be true - but on a global scale. The probability is, just as globalism has lifted billions out of absolute poverty at the cost of C1C2DE jobs and wealth in the developed world, that in the absence of checks on the distributional effects of the AI revolution, the same will happen. The developed world will bear the losses, the developing world will take the gains, and the global 1% will become even wealthier.

The forces driving globalism are the global corporates, backed by supranational actors including the EU, UN, IMF and OECD. And of course all their dags and ninnies such as deluded young Remainers motivated purely by selfish motives - that their Erasmus freebies are threatened, or that they can no longer wander the Med nations like gypsies, sponging, ligging and dossing their way around the Shengen zone. This short term self-interest blinds them to the real threat of supranationalism

That the current generation in the developed world is one of the most educated, and yet has lower
chances of achieving the same standard of living as its parents.

Well guess what? The OECD, one of the villains of it all, has just twigged that its policies have been killing the golden goose. Gabriela Ramos, OECD chief of staff, has warned that folk like us are waking up to the effects of globalism, and this awareness would fuel the rise of both 'populism' and protectionism. Tyler Durden writes on Zerohedge:

Leave it to Rabobank's Michael Every to break down the hypocrisy in the OECD's policy recommendations. It's not that the recommendations are inherently idiotic. It's that a supranational organization which, more than any other, represents the global elite who are largely responsible for the economic malaise gripping the developed world, is prescribing a policy regime that stands in direct contrast to the policies its members have propagated for the last four decades. How can the OECD shift from advocating for austerity and central bank interventionism, the latter of which has largely fueled the bubble in asset prices responsible for the yawning gap between the rich and everybody else, to the platform of Democratic socialists like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Well, now that awareness of the dangers of the EU, IMF, UN, OECD and the global corporates is finally penetrating the thick skulls of the EUphiles we may just have a chance of rescuing the UK.

Addendum
The following taxonomy may assist a confusion in the minds of some of our readers

Progressives – post-globalists. Internationalists, Localists, committed to democratic outcomes and social equity. To sovereign states. Radical reform of tax and welfare systems, renewal of political identities, encouraging responsible capitalism to generate wealth , recognition of the deep and fundamental changes that AI and technology will bring, committed to achieving a Burkean social integrity and coherence in contrast to a globalist anomie

Globalists - Committed to global government, a world-wide constitution and harmonisation of everything, open borders, unrestricted global economic activity, worldwide legal, judicial and justice systems, abrogation of personal freedoms to a class of benign appointed experts who will act in the general good, the growth of the 'citizen of everywhere', the rule of benign technocracy over 'old fashioned' democracy, the supremacy of supranational State authorities – EU, UN, IMF.

Finally - Newspaper polls are self selecting. I suspect if the Guardian polled 20,000 readers, the TIGers and Corbyn's Labour would be neck-and-neck on 40% each, but there's something joyful about the pride with which the Express reveals today its own poll. My poor party barely scrapes 1% - and if there's a message here, it's that MAY MUST GO NOW.

30 comments:

Well, now that awareness of the dangers of the EU, IMF, UN, OECD and the global corporates is finally penetrating the thick skulls of the EUphiles we may just have a chance of rescuing the UK.-Raed

Hmmm...which bit of World Trade Organisation do those clamoring for a WTF-Brexit not understand?

PS those Newspaper 'polls' are so easy to 'hack' that even calling it 'hacking' would embarrass the average Scriptkiddy -several of us at Frank's place used to do it on such 'polls' if the Anti-smokers were out in force. Usually all one has to do is install a better browser.

If you were true to all your views you would leave your party. It cannot be reformed from within even if the odious May were to go, which is unlikely; she'll be destroying the country for the foreseeable future unless enough of you people get some courage.

The Tory party is rotten with cultural Marxist views and beliefs among all May's acolytes and most MPs and it must be cut down to the ground so something fresh and clean can grow.

As the two spanking new 737 Maxes falling out of the sky show, people in high places really have had enough of experts. Aeronautical engineers warned in vain, about the inadequate testing regime now operating in the US. You can slap whatever tariffs you like on Airbus, Don, but people would rather fly those now. You can't buck the market.

So reality always does bite, in the end.

I wonder what it will take, to wake up the Leavers and Tory/UKIP voters here?

This piece "it's all the fault of progress" doesn't shed any light, quite the reverse. Occam's razor is warranted.

Whilst the Brexit Party may be a worthy recipient of an EP protest vote, it is not worthy of any place in a mature democracy - it is not a party made up of members, but a business organisation run on authoritarian grounds that deny any say to the membership.

UKIP is a rump of muslim baiters which will eventually admit Yaxley-Lemon to membership.

As far as my beliefs go, the Conservative party, though desperately in need of reform, of a cull of rogue MPs and a new constitution, is the only place for me - at least it is reformable, and to an extent democratic.

I wonder what it will take, to wake up the Remainers and Labour/Tiggers voters here?

The Roman empire has come and gone.The Hanseatic League no longer dominates Northern EuropeThe British Empire has been disassembled.The USSR blew apart.

Does the protoEmpire of the EU (founded with the attitudes of the previous century) still deserve the acquiescence of its subjects? The EU is fixated on 'ever closer union' yet empires last longer if they allow their various peoples some elbow room.

The world is messy and cannot be compressed into a simple dogma. People are not perfectible. Collectives aim at Utopia and so far have always failed because... people.

Globalisation has been taxing many fine minds over the last decade or so. The 'solutions' seem to be lots more education or walling off one's country economically speaking. Neither seems to me likely to help much, as solutions they seem pretty cynical, more education point to a leg up for one's kids whilst walling off pleases those who dislike garlic and foreigners. Neither 'solution' looks to solve the problem, just take the edge off a bit.

Then we come to the UK's little local difficulty - Brexit. To my mind the interesting question is Cui Bono. Seems to have been lurking in the minds of the far right Eurosceptics for a long long time. The referendum result followed on from the effects of globalisation and a lack of planning and a lack of education. We can see the same effect in Trump's USA. So who benefits from stirring up something for which the supposed cures seem about as bad as the disease they are supposed to sure.

Follow the money. The UK is like an elderly household with a limited lifespan, failed to invest in its heirs and has lots of property worth selling off. Isolate and then rob looks a good strategy. Of course one would never make that too obvious but I reckon that is the real agenda.

Education is 'a good thing' but worthless unless coupled to services and industry. Then the Bell Curve suggests that there are definite limits to what education can achieve. If you want to run your economy 'hot' you have to import ready trained brains, you can't make enough of your own. Which brings us to pulling up the economic ladders, never a great idea. My contacts tell me US tariffs on Chinese made product are benefiting India and Vietnam wonderfully. So we are left with robbery as the real agenda and we are going to get poorer as well. Cheer up.

"Globalism" is an unhelpful contraction. What the author self-evidently means is "global capitalism".

Yes, it does a number of bad things to people. That is for no other reason than that the law in many countries allows and permits its operators and beneficiaries to do those things.

The laws which might relieve or prevent those effects have been repealed, by decades of neoliberal national governments. It would be problematic to reinstate them as isolated nations, because any given country would slide down the rankings in the global Race To The Bottom.

That is exactly why co-operative associations of nations - such as the EU, but not always in that form - are needed. Only such blocs have the command, to stand up to the might of Private Power now. With the neoliberal, doctrinaire UK leaving, the southern EU nations will be better placed to promote these policies. I wish them every success.

The EU is not a co-opertaive association of nations - if it were, we would not be in this mess. It is set on becoming a sovereign power, taking sovereignty from 'member' nations, with its own army, finance minister, central bank and seat at the UN. It is a supranational bully.

Globalisation is a neutral term for an inevitable process that arises from advances in transport, communication, technology. It means 3G phones in the barrios and favelas.

Globalism is a policy - a system of supranational governance and freedom of movement of capital, not just goods and services in trade. It was made possible by the changes to Bretton-Woods from 1971 that ended capital controls.

One of the comments was regarding the 737 aircraft, no idea how accurate it is, here's a copy..................

You know who fell for France’s climate change bullsht.. Boeing.. They decided to change the engines in their most profitable workhorse – the 737 Max.. And who had a hand in making these engines..? France.. And Boeing fell for it because they were 14% more energy efficient..

Can you believe that.. Just 14%.. And was engineered and designed by French mechanics.. AND which required Boeing to modify the superstructure of what was their most profitable workhorse..

The definition of ‘Stupid’.. No common sense.. Somebody at Boeing believes in the climate change fairy.. And have never known or owned a Jaguar..

It’s like when Coca Cola changed their formula for no good reason.. Duped into defeating themselves..

The policy prescription it seems is still bigger government. When will these cretins, and I include electorates realise that the fundamental problem is big government and the excessive regulation which prevents the competition which breeds innovation which leads to wealth creation.

Even now the german government is doubling down and trying to create further national champions including by forcing the merger of two failing banks.

Maybe - but does this mean the claims that there is a significant number of people calling for a second referendum (i.e. the 6 million) is similarly embarrassing?- Dave G

Despite claims to the contrary about the 6 million being 'genuine', my gut feeling is that about a 1/2 million of them will be fake. Faking a few hundred on a website pseudo-poll(its goal is advertising/clicks)is a piece of pish, my 4 year Granddaughter could do it (she was born with a Smart phone in her hand as all kids are these days), but seriously 'hacking' the government petition site requires some actual skill, computing power and probably a bot net and those who have those wouldn't stop at a measly 6 Million-which is still in the 'irrelevant' category. My 1/2 million 'fakes' guess is based on all the 'i signed it 80 times with Jacob Reese Mogg' nonsense.

Further to my last comment in reply to Dave-G. I have just glanced over the DE Poll and the result table alone tells its own story namely :perhaps 10 or so tpb'ers spent far too much time constantly reclicking. On Apester 'polls', using the very simplest refresh/reclick manual method (ie no 'automation' such as I used to use) you can-depending on a whole variety of factors-submit some 20-40 'votes' an hour.

At a guess I would assume all the other results were more or less genuine.

Whilst you correctly point out that the Brexit Party is not a political party, you don't seem to get, why it has been set up in that way.

The point is that, if you have a vision and an associated goal to pursue a particular policy, or try to take the country in a new direction, what you are after is not a tendency, but a direct campaign. This is new in British political party methodology, it is the beginnings of direct democracy.

As you say, it may be worth voting for at the possible upcoming EP elections or the next GE. In ten years, there might be an equally fervent campaign on some other issue like AI and a new appropriate campaign led by someone just as motivated as Nigel. This is Nigel's vision, if you like it, vote for his campaign.

I was quite surprised when he decided to call it the brexit party, it seemed too directed at one policy... But then I realised, that is just the way he wants it. In the same way that we don't want to be government or EU slaves, we don't want to be party slaves either.

If the six million is in fact 2 million you will be bloody lucky Ketch. Your gang of liars likes to multiply by three of four times minimum.1 to 1.5 millin more like it. Your 750 thou march was 250 thou TOPS and your million 300 thou again TOPS. Less than that more likely and one third of the number via remainiac scum dragging their politicised kids along to boost numbers. And this in Remain HQ London where the bastards had only to get on a bus or the Tube.

"Increasing financial inequality Static or declining living standards People excluded from decision making Decline of working class power Globalism causing disempowerment Cultural loss – loss of cultural identity Attrition of social institutions, high anomie"Just a few of the tenets of the Frankfurt School of Thought. It seems that many of our political masters may be students of politics, but not students of history.

You believe the party is capable of reform. What progress has been made to reverse the decline in the party's direction and achieve the changes which you say are needed; give me some proof. As you say its your party, what are you doing?

You admit to fatal flaws and suggest it be dismantled and rebuilt. You seem unable to defend it, so you descend to smearing and belittling its opposition.

The object of the Tory party is to protect itself above all other things and you sound like a true old fashioned elitist Tory.

People tend to be judged by the company they keep. The good may thus go down the drain with the bad.